We need a constitutional amendment

Putting it in the Governor's hands gives an awful lot of power to whoever's doing that job at the moment (it won't always be Dayton -- or even a Dem).

The 2/3 vote should be a little more consistent.

Generally, I don't think these ballot amendments are a good idea. They allow demagogues to flood the airwaves with propaganda and bypass the normal legislative process. Worse, they don't change laws, they change the constitution.

Thankfully, neither one passed this time, but I'd be happier if it were almost impossible to do this at all.

In states where they are allowed they are PART of the normal legislative process.

I agree that veto is too much power in the governors hands, especially when these measures have the ability to force the state governments hands when they are acting in opposition to the people's wishes. It basically says 1 person knows better than the voters and allows state governments to suppress the voice that their constitutions were crafted to empower.

It should require more than a bare majority in the legislature to put before the people - and NO amendment that affects people's rights should EVER be put to a popular vote! That's insane.

of those voting for it to pass.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constam.html

It has to be approved by 2/3 of both House and Senate and then by 3/4 of the states.

A few years ago I put it as proposal during my caucus. It went to a vote during the senate convention but have no idea what happened.

I suggested it because I knew that something like what we had this year was going to happen.

The ballot measures in California have made this state ungovernable.

perhaps 60%. Amendments should not be used to legislate, the function of the constitution is only supposed to be to define the system of government and protect civil liberties.